Counterfeit Conservative

The American Conservative ^ | Doug Bandow

[G.Mason]

Yawn.

Pitty poor Mr. Bandow.

Someone told him GWB was a Conservative and he obviously believed them.

[slowhand520]

Why does everyone believe that they are more conservative than the next guy?

[weegee]

Yeah, I would rather have had President Gore or McCain in 2001. < /sarcasm >

Where was the conservative Republican candidate who ran against Bush in 2004?

Where is the agenda being led by the Republican majority? Need an even bigger majority? It'll never happen when the base decides to stay home for lack of satisfaction.

[MineralMan]

Bump for later reading.

[MineralMan]

There sure seem to be plenty of anti-Bush screeds being posted lately. What's that about?

[Cyber Liberty]

'Cause they ain't never had to run nothin' but their mouths.

[KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle]

Need an even bigger majority? It'll never happen when the base decides to stay home for lack of satisfaction.

Bears repeating.

[Cyber Liberty]

Posturing for '08, not caring if the 'Craps take over '06.

[jdsteel]

I'm thinking it's jostling for position for November 2006, and sides are being taken.

[ConservativeDude]

I'll just get this out so that the GWB loyalists don't have to:

- Without GWB we would be in danger of terrorism (partially true - but not the basis of the criticism in this article...no one has said that he is failing as commander in chief; even FDR can win a war)

- The Democrats would be worse on spending (arguably false, as if the D's were in charge, the GOP would become an effective opposition party)

- if you oppose GWB, you are a RINO using DU and DNC talking points (whatever...that's one of the points of the article ie that the vilification of those who dare question the king is poor procedure and in this White House has led to profoundly liberal policies)

Now...if the Bush loyalists have better arguments than those to SUBSTANTIVELY deal with this article and not just bitch and moan at the author and those who agree with them, then there are a lot of us here who are all ears.

(While we're at it, I wonder if the accounting guru's who have us the numbers for the prescription drugs benefit factored in all of the amnesty for illegals who will now officially become part of the Republican welfare state? Anyone think of that? Anyone?)

[Conservative Coulter Fan]

I believe the issue has, and continues to be, the complete indifference or, at times, hostility, to conservative values by the very political party that a great deal of conservatives belong to and support. The whole notion of smaller goverment in Washington D.C. has been killed by a corrupt one party system evidenced by tha rapidity of spending and growth evidenced by the Prescription drug bill ($600 billion), Farm Bill ($200 billion), Highway Bill ($200 Billion, I believe), unprecedented levels of federal education spending under the Bush/Kennedy "No Child Left Behind' Act, and so forth.

Your question is evidence of a problem - conservatism is fractured and balkanized or it is used so perjoratively (conservative) that it has lost meaning, thus, many people adopt it.

[rob777]

Pitty poor Mr. Bandow.

Someone told him GWB was a Conservative and he obviously believed them.





If I remember right, Mr. Bandow was one of those few conservatives who were suspicious of Bush from the beginning. Now that Bush is getting ready to depart from the political stage, the battle is on to reclaim the centrality of limited government to the conservative message.

[rellimpank]

--yep--the present state of affairs, unfortunately reflects the political reality of a nation where the majority who vote are on the lookout for a federal handout instead of personal responsibility:

--it can be summed up as "I want everything now and I want somebody else to pay for it--

[EveningStar]

misc ping

[Cyber Liberty]

Here's an even better way to get out in front with all the arguments from all sides:

Read the thread that's already been posted.

[ModelBreaker]

The author makes some good points but starts sounding like Teddy Kennedy about half-way through--but the Buchanan bunch tend to do that.

The best case they can make is that W has been a very mixed bag for conservatives. On the one hand, you have the vigorous prosecution of the war on terror, tax cuts, and Alito and Roberts. Not trivial accomplishments.

But on the other hand, you have CFR, runaway Federal Deficits, Prescription Drug Benefits, expansion of the Dept of Education, an almost astonishing indifference to illegal immigration, and a deliberate gelding of the conservative wing of the party, all orchestrated by the white house. Many of these represent a rejection of Reagan's and the founding father's fundamental vision.

But the author goes over the cliff into Teddy and Hill land with crap like 'unbridled hubris', 'betrayal,' and so on.

[My2Cents]

There sure seem to be plenty of anti-Bush screeds being posted lately. What's that about?

The natives are restless.

[conservativecorner]

Sadly, I must agree with the author's tenants which is why it's so very critical to look at a person's policy positions instead of his or her electability because it will always come back to bite you in the arse.

I support President Bush, and I strongly supported him through two elections, but I'm very disappointed in his judgment starting with Meirs. Actually, it was earlier than that because I've been troubled by the huge deficits we are running for awhile.

I know the President advocated something akin to his current immigration proposal during the 2000 election, but I'm disappointed that 9/11 hasn't changed his mind concerning an open border policy. 20 years from now we will be discussing what went wrong with the 2006 amnesty plan. I also understand that 9/11 was a tremendous shock to not only our economy but the worlds as well. Stimulation of the economy was necessary to stave off a severe recession or worse, but that crisis time has passed. Why are we still running huge deficits when by every measure the economy is doing well?

[Conservative Coulter Fan]

Are you suggesting that the only real choice for conservatives, those of principle, that there only true choice is the liberalism of one party or the liberalism-lite of the other party thereby ensuring they have no representation in Government at all?